Microsoft’s Assurance on Call of Duty for PlayStation at FTC Hearing
During the hearings held by the United States Federal Trade Commission, executives discussed the Microsoft-Activision Blizzard agreement. The focus centered on promises that the Call of Duty franchise would continue to appear on Sony PlayStation consoles. The discourse underscored the importance of keeping a major multi-platform game accessible to a broad audience, including players in Canada and the United States.
One of Sony’s central concerns in challenging the acquisition involved maintaining healthy competition between the two major console brands. In the proceedings, Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley of the Federal District Court for the Northern District of California pressed Phil Spencer, head of Microsoft’s gaming division, to confirm that the company would not withhold a flagship title from a rival platform without good reason. The aim was to ensure continued access to Call of Duty for PlayStation users, a move seen as critical to preserving competition in the market.
Spencer responded with a formal assurance, stating that Microsoft would continue to release future iterations of Call of Duty for Sony PlayStation. He noted that Microsoft would honor this commitment as long as it aligned with Sony’s interests and market conditions, signaling a cooperative stance rather than a strategic move to weaken a competing platform.
Beyond the immediate game, the Xbox executive emphasized the broader impact on the companies involved. PlayStation owners have historically built a substantial audience for Call of Duty, and maintaining cross-platform availability would support Activision Blizzard and Microsoft as the merger moves forward. The hearing also anticipated remarks from Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella and Activision CEO Bobby Kotick, who were expected to address the five-day proceedings and provide further context about strategic plans for the combined entity.
Earlier statements noted tensions between Sony and Microsoft over platform access, with some arguments pointing to how ownership of popular titles could influence market dynamics. The discussion highlighted the role of blockbuster games in shaping consumer choice and competitive balance, a topic of ongoing significance for regulators and industry observers in both North America and beyond. The dialogue reflected a careful attempt to balance business objectives with the interests of players who expect ongoing multi-platform access to major franchises.
In summary, the testimony at the FTC hearing centered on a simple but pivotal question: will Call of Duty remain available on PlayStation after the proposed merger? The answer, as framed by Spencer, pointed to a continuing, multi-platform strategy designed to sustain consumer choice while supporting the growth of Activision Blizzard and Microsoft in a rapidly evolving gaming landscape.
As the proceedings continued, observers in North America watched closely for further clarifications on distribution, timing, and potential implications for other titles within the portfolio. The discussion illustrated how the fate of a single, iconic series can influence regulatory perspectives and the expectations of millions of players who count on reliable access across consoles.